User talk:Stephen Bain
 | This user may have left Wikipedia. Stephen Bain has not edited Wikipedia since 14 September 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
Aldgatetroll
[edit]Been looking over some of your Wikipedia contributions and although admirable miss a few basic foundation blocks in law.
My great uncle was personal private secretary to Curtin and Chifley and later commissioner of industrial relations. I inherited some documents (placed in secure care in the UK) which outlined the reluctance of Curtin in taking on the Westminster Adoption Act point blank. Other documents form part of my matter I have raised in the SA Supreme Court that caused a 'lock down' by chief justice kourakis and a full bench sitting on appeal to my matter.
I admire your energy and voluminous contribution to Wikipedia, BUT what day do you celebrate Australia's independence? I wrote to John Howard, and the GG, both refused to reply, so a good mate forwarded the intent of my letter to Her majesty, she requested I forward it to her. I received a reply in 8 days that ordered the GG to respond to my request. I visited London 3 months later for a cup of tea and a quite chit chat.
At that time 2004 I was National President of One Nation and with the support of several retired well known legal persons, I viewed several hundred documents proving this fact as an absolute. This was confirmed by both political and legal persons in the UK. So it became a rather large 'oups' moment for Howard but with a bit of effort he was able to shut people up. Thus:
I note that Schedule 7, Part 4 “Seditious intention”; means an intention to effect any of the following purposes: a) To bring the Sovereign into hatred or contempt; b) To urge disaffection against the following: i. The Constitution; ii. The Government of the Commonwealth; iii. Either House of the Parliament; c) To urge another person to attempt, otherwise than by lawful means, to procure a change to any matter established by law in the Commonwealth; d) To promote feelings of ill-will or hostility between different groups so as to threaten the peace, order and good government of the Commonwealth.
So I look forward to my future endeavours that will shed light on the oversight of where Australia really stands on the Independence issue and just how many Federal and State statute laws will fall once its officially recognised.
Kindest Regards Neil Russell-TaylorAldgatetroll (talk) 04:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)--Aldgatetroll (talk) 04:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- I presume this is in relation to Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942? I suggest you read Wikipedia:No original research. Even if
- the documents you refer to exist,
- the legal theory your position rests on is sound, and
- you really did have tea with Her Maj,
- Wikipedia content is based on extant knowledge only. --bainer (talk) 05:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Bendigo workshop 2013
[edit]Can you help? Wikimedia Australia will be holding an introductory training day for editing Wikipedia and related projects. With support from La Trobe University and Bendigo Community Health Services, it is for health information professionals across the region. It will also be open to other information community groups as well (regional historic societies, librarians and the like). The workshop is on Thursday, February 21, at Latrobe University Bendigo. If you can help, please contact Leighblackall or Peterdownunder, or register directly at the Wikimedia page.--Peterdownunder (talk) 06:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Per-page contributions in es:wikipedia
[edit]Hi. I'm trying to use the Per-page contributions tool to search in eswiki project and I receive a "Invalid username!" error message whatever username or page is submitted. Tried other language like itwiki and it's OK. Gustronico (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
RfC:Infobox Road proposal
[edit]WP:AURD (Australian Roads), is inviting comment on a proposal to convert Australian road articles to {{infobox road}}. Please come and discuss. The vote will be after concerns have been looked into.
You are being notified as a member on the list of WP:AUS
Nbound (talk) 06:10, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Request for comment
[edit]Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of LS Studio
[edit]
The article LS Studio has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- It's an article about a criminal organization thinly disguised as one about a company based that is barely sourced.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 19:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
[edit]
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
[edit]
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
[edit]
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Acalamari 09:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Division of Murray
[edit]The article Division of Murray has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BT80 (talk) 10:14, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
29th Melbourne Meetup
[edit]Hello, you have previously indicated that you would be interested in attending Melbourne meetups. A meetup will be held on Wednesday August 12, 2015 6-8pm. Please check out Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 29 for details and add your name to the list if you think you can attend. --Michael Billington (talk) 12:04, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
File:Symbol comment vote 2.svg listed for discussion
[edit]A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Symbol comment vote 2.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:34, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Stephen Bain. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Fair Use in Australia discussion
[edit]As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery
Orphaned non-free image File:Reinhado.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Reinhado.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:08, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Melbourne Wikimeetup (June/July)
[edit]
|
Melbourne Meetup
|
 | |
Hi, I've just made a doodle poll to vote on the best date for the next Wikimeetup in Melbourne (Beer Deluxe, Fed Square). Would be great to see you there. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 12:36, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Date of next Melbourne meetup decided:
- When: 6-8pm, Sunday 8 July 2018
- Where: Beer DeLuxe, Flinders St
T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 01:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Precious
[edit]justice in Australia
Thank you for quality articles about law case and lawyers in Australia, such as Dietrich v The Queen, Al-Kateb v Godwin and Robert Garran, for service as admin and arb, - Stephen, repeating (from ten years ago, when you replied "Sweet! And it's nice that someone considers me beautiful ;) "): you are an awesome Wikipedian!
 | |
| Ten years! |
|---|
Miss you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Australian law
[edit]
Template:WikiProject Australian law has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 19:48, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Nomination for merging of Template:Courtesy blanked
[edit]
Template:Courtesy blanked has been nominated for merging with Template:Discussion blanked. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 16:00, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
March 2020
[edit]
A page you created has been nominated for deletion because it is a biography of a living person that is entirely negative in tone and has unsourced content, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
Do not create articles about living people that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative, unreferenced biographies of living people, along with attack pages, are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy may be blocked from editing. IW. (talk) 22:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
March 2020
[edit]A page you created has been nominated for deletion because it is a biography of a living person that is entirely negative in tone and has unsourced content, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
Do not create articles about living people that are entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Wikipedia has a policy of verifiability and any negative information we use must be reliably sourced, and our articles must be balanced. Negative, unreferenced biographies of living people, along with attack pages, are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy may be blocked from editing. IW. (talk) 22:48, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Robert Garran FAR
[edit]I have nominated Robert Garran for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox United States District Court case
[edit]Template:Infobox United States District Court case has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox court case. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 18:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
File:Padlock.svg
[edit]Now that File:Padlock.svg is no longer used anywhere in the interface, any objection to deleting our local copy of it? Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:41, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
[edit] | |
| Two years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:04, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Nomination for merging of Template:Infobox UK Supreme Court case
[edit]Template:Infobox UK Supreme Court case has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox court case. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:17, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for merger of Template:Infobox English case
[edit]Template:Infobox English case has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox court case. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 02:22, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for merger of Template:SCOJCase
[edit]Template:SCOJCase has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox court case. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Izno (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
FAR for Al-Kateb v Godwin
[edit]I have nominated Al-Kateb v Godwin for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 22:37, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
FAR notice
[edit]I have nominated Dietrich v The Queen for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:15, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Music Notation link
[edit]I tried to put a link in the Music Notation article for Express Stave, like the link for Clairnote. Is this not allowed? Why not? John Keller (talk) 02:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Music Notation link
[edit]I tried to put a link in the Music Notation article for Express Stave, like the link for Clairnote. Is this not allowed? Why not? John Keller (talk) 02:16, 4 December 2021 (UTC) Now it seems someone has deleted the reference to Express Stave altogether. John Keller (talk) 02:16, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Hugo rich mugshot lowres.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Hugo rich mugshot lowres.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:31, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Cpoll participant
[edit]Template:Cpoll participant has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:51, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Sue v Hill
[edit]Sue v Hill has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)